About Scott Cleland
![]() |
|
You are hereAntitrustGoogleopoly -- can you say "predatory cross-subsidization"?Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-08-01 19:04For those following the FTC's Google-DoubleClick merger review (and whether my prediction in my Googleopoly.net white paper that the FTC will block this merger is on the mark), this link to an article called "Google's Killer App" is a current and real life case study of how Google anti-competitively forecloses competition in the markets adjacent to them.
This excellent case study article is by Brandt Dainow, a web analytics competitor to Google who has conceded that: "Open Hypocrisy!" eBay-Skype "Blocks" application competitionSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2007-07-27 10:11It is clear that "open access" is not a true "principle" for eBay-Skype, but a self-serving scheme by eBay to cloak their obvious "private interest" behind the greater "public interest."
Open access to eBay-Skype is a blatant double standard where eBay wants government to regulate their competitors to eBay-Skype's commercial advantage, but do not want the principle applied to eBay-Skype. Must read WSJ Holman Jenkins today... the "Master" of satire!Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-07-25 12:23Great satire is rare.
Please read it and laugh out loud and shout ouch! The pen is surely mightier than the algorithm. What are the specific anti-competitive effects of Google-DoubleClick?Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2007-07-20 12:37The antitrust relevance of yesterday's New York Times reported quote: " ...marketers increasingly want to combine their purchases of search and display advertising." has really quite profound implications for the pending Google-Double-Click deal.
What that quote does is zero in on what really matters to FTC antitrust authorities -- how would the transaction actually change the current competitive dynamic, or more specifically, how would the merger "substantially lessen competition," which is the legal standard for approving/disapproving mergers. Googleopoly evidence growing #1: Yahoo's search/display problemSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-07-18 18:39Google tries to maintain that search and display advertising are separate markets and not direct competitors. It appears Yahoo would beg to differ. Today's New York Times reported:
Great WSJ Editorial on Google: "Sort of Evil" Will consumer groups tune in?Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-07-18 12:21Please don't miss Holman Jenkin's great Wall Street Journal editorial on Google: "Sort of Evil." I particularly like his new term for net neutrality/open access regulation: "business model chauvinism." Dead on.
He also points the spotlight on what Google is really doing in organizing groups to view broadband companies as the big public enemy for things they might do in the future, and how that conveniently distracts people from scrutinizing Google's own increasing dominance of online advertising and the business model of the Internet. Google surrogate CCIA lashes back against "Googleopoly" reportSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-07-17 19:12It didn't take long for the Empire to Strike back! Shortly after the release of Googleopoly, Ed Black, President and CEO of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, which represents Google, put out a critical press release on my Googleopoly white paper entitled: "Merger Report Unconvincing."
As expected they tried to discredit the messenger because they don't like the message. Standard operating procedure from my debate opponents. Why the FTC Will Likely Block the Google-DoubleClick MergerSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-07-17 09:52My detailed analysis over the last several weeks leads me to believe that the FTC is likely to block the Google-DoubleClick merger because it will enable Google to dominate online advertising and dramatically increase the opportunity for market collusion and price manipulation in the market for consumer click data, ad-performance tools, ad-brokering and ad-exchanges. Antitrust is fact-specific and evidence-driven. To understand the true antitrust outlook for a merger one needs to become familiar with the core facts of the case. To date, media and investment coverage of this merger has been remarkably superficial.
I see three big takeaways from my white paper. First, the more people learn about this merger the more concern they will develop. Googleopoly conf. call Tues. July 17 11am EST on Google-DoubleClick mergerSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-07-16 15:38You're invited to participate in a conference call Tuesday July 17th at 11 am EST to hear a discussion of, and Q&A on, my new 35-page white paper, entitled:
I will explain how a Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) - DoubleClick merger will facilitate a de facto Internet information access monopoly, substantially lessen competition, and harm consumers, Internet content providers, and advertisers. New evidence of why Google so dominates searchSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-07-05 12:59The New York Times article today: "South Koreans Connect Through Search Engine" provides a huge window into what the real source of a search engine's market dominance is. (The article indicates that in South Korea, Naver.com is the leading search engine with 77% share, followed by South Korean company Daum.net with 10.8%, and Yahoo with 4.4%. Google's market share is 1.7% in South Korea.)
Specifically, what makes Google's 1.7% South Korean search market share different from its 90% share in Germany, Spain, 82% share in France, 75% share in the UK, and its 65% share in the US -- given that Google has been competing in the South Korean market since 2000? Pages |